So It Wasn't Satan!

[iBlue]

I don't like it on principle (I think advertising has gone way too far in many ways) but mostly what bugs me is the presentation...

Here's a video.

That's kind of scary. Maybe if it were not used in such a creepy way it would go over better. If I were walking past a Coca Cola sign and heard the sound of a can being opened and some quick reference to Coke, OK, that might be annoying and surprise you but it's not on the same level as that paranormal thing. That is a really cruel way to use that technology. That's going to freak people out, especially kids for that matter.

It's neat technology but in this instance it's being used in a lousy way.

 

[mpw]

...It's neat technology but in this instance it's being used in a lousy way.

I agree, but the same accusation could be aimed at any media or technology, which is why there's little point in, as others have called for in this thread, banning this technology or media in particular.

 

[pseudobrit]

I agree, but the same accusation could be aimed at any media or technology, which is why there's little point in, as others have called for in this thread, banning this technology or media in particular.

But we have banned telephone solicitations for simply being annoying. It's a public nuisance and a quality of life issue. I expect laws to be written or existing ones extended to effectively rid us of this type of advertising for the same reasons.

 

[mpw]

But we have banned telephone solicitations for simply being annoying. It's a public nuisance and a quality of life issue. I expect laws to be written or existing ones extended to effectively rid us of this type of advertising for the same reasons.

Telephone solicitations are specific to your private phone though, this technology isn't the same it's specific to a particular place, just as a billboard is or an illuminated sign.

Don't get me wrong, if regulations need to be amended because it becomes a more significant annoyance then other forms of advertising I'm all for it, but people here have been claiming that it's something it isn't, which is not a good reason to ban something completely.

 

[Pani]

"I'm really struggling to make any sense of most of the arguments people in this thread have put against this particular technology. Most arguments seem to include all advertising, which seems just impossibly ridiculous to me."

MP, I am not going to argue with you any more because you have completely missed the point of the counterarguments. That is why they seem ridiculous to you. You don't really hear what they are saying. It is also obvious you don't have a mental health background. All I can say is if someone who suffers from schizophrenia loses it in a mall, I hope it is the advertisers who have to deal with the consequences!

 

[pseudobrit]

Telephone solicitations are specific to your private phone though, this technology isn't the same it's specific to a particular place, just as a billboard is or an illuminated sign.

Don't get me wrong, if regulations need to be amended because it becomes a more significant annoyance then other forms of advertising I'm all for it, but people here have been claiming that it's something it isn't, which is not a good reason to ban something completely.

I think a big part of the problem is that the human mind has a much easier time filtering out extraneous and distracting visual stimuli than it does with audible alerts.

I think of when I used to listen to the radio in the car and an ad would come on and sneak in audio of a police car's siren. This would of course cause an instant reaction as I'd quickly and nervously look around for the emergency vehicle. I thought this was obnoxious and dangerous, but I don't listen to radio anymore ever and I'm not sure if it still goes on. The same thing could happen on the street if suddenly you're blasted with advertising audio: a distraction causes an accident.

What if you're riding a bicycle at 20mph close to the sidewalk and suddenly you're scared ******** by the sensation of someone whispering in your ear? I know it'd unsettle me.

 

[mpw]

...What if you're riding a bicycle at 20mph close to the sidewalk and suddenly you're scared ******** by the sensation of someone whispering in your ear? I know it'd unsettle me.

Riding your bike at 20mph and a car sounds it's horn, would therefore also scare you, a person shouting from the sidewalk, another cyclist etc. etc. this isn't the only audible sound on the street so why is it in particular going to cause somebody to be scared. And if it's not the only thing which is more sensible; ban all sound, or perhaps the easily scared cyclist needs to wear ear protectors for his, and others safety.

Maybe people driving should just be required to drive 'with due care and attention'... oh, they already are.

This same technology could be use in cars so that the radio couldn't be heard by the driver, only his passengers. This would, by your theory, prevent accidents, so why don't you call for traditional radios to be banned from cars in place of this technology?

 

[Iscariot]

Good. I'm already a hair's bredth from snapping during the holiday season anyhow. Frankly, I could use the motivation.

 

[Schtumple]

Good. I'm already a hair's bredth from snapping during the holiday season anyhow. Frankly, I could use the motivation.

haha

same, thank god i live in the sticks where technology is burnt at the stake

 

[pseudobrit]

Riding your bike at 20mph and a car sounds it's horn, would therefore also scare you,

Which is why motorists aren't supposed to do it.

a person shouting from the sidewalk, another cyclist etc. etc. this isn't the only audible sound on the street so why is it in particular going to cause somebody to be scared.

Because while someone shouting from the sidewalk or blasting their horn from behind me is a very external and remote noise where the distance and direction can be quickly ascertained, I'd be quite freaked by the sensation of someone sharply whispering into my ear in the same setting.

This same technology could be use in cars so that the radio couldn't be heard by the driver, only his passengers. This would, by your theory, prevent accidents, so why don't you call for traditional radios to be banned from cars in place of this technology?

I'm sorry, I don't claim to have a unified "theory" on this, just random simple concerns based on my experience, which I've expressed plainly and without need for extreme extrapolation.

Ultimately it comes down to the idea that it's a public nuisance and uses a loophole to violate existing noise ordinances. That is why it will go away.

 

[mpw]

Which is why motorists aren't supposed to do it...

Oooookay? So why do they fit horns to cars?

...I'd be quite freaked by the sensation of someone sharply whispering into my ear in the same setting...

It comes across like you're in the camp that understands the technology as 'beaming into your head', it's just a speaker, a loudspeaker and you only get a sensation of someone "sharply whispering into [your] ear" if the recording is somebody whispering, and even then it's just a recording from a detached loudspeaker, you don't feel the breath on your neck. Most adverts don't have somebody whispering, most would be some tosser telling you how white his powder is going to wash you pants. Are you really saying that hearing recorded voices from a loudspeaker freaks you out? You must look f*cking suspicious at the airport!

 

[pseudobrit]

Oooookay? So why do they fit horns to cars?

For reasons that do not include "alert a cyclist to your presence".

It comes across like you're in the camp that understands the technology as 'beaming into your head', it's just a speaker, a loudspeaker and you only get a sensation of someone "sharply whispering into [your] ear" if the recording is somebody whispering, and even then it's just a recording from a detached loudspeaker, you don't feel the breath on your neck. Most adverts don't have somebody whispering, most would be some tosser telling you how white his powder is going to wash you pants. Are you really saying that hearing recorded voices from a loudspeaker freaks you out? You must look f*cking suspicious at the airport!

I understand what it is and how it works. I don't like it because it's a form of advertising which our society has already deemed to be unacceptable. How many times must I say this before you stop harping on the minutiae?

 

[mpw]

For reasons that do not include "alert a cyclist to your presence"...

But a moment ago you said motorists weren't to sound their horns at all, and anyway I think the horn could be correctly used to alert a cyclist to a vehicle's presence, at least under the UK Highway Code.

Again maybe it's a difference between the US society and other parts of the world, but I'm not aware of UK or local society having already decided that audio advertising is unacceptable.

 

[pseudobrit]

But a moment ago you said motorists weren't to sound their horns at all, and anyway I think the horn could be correctly used to alert a cyclist to a vehicle's presence, at least under the UK Highway Code.

I didn't say that. Motorists are only supposed to use their horns to warn of immediate danger when around bicyclists. Honking at a cyclist as motorists often do – to alert us to their presence – is useless at best and dangerous at worst. Perhaps I misunderstood your phrasing when first responding.

Again maybe it's a difference between the US society and other parts of the world, but I'm not aware of UK or local society having already decided that audio advertising is unacceptable.

Again, we have noise ordinances that restrict and prevent these things.

How many times must I say this before you stop harping on the minutiae?

Seriously are you just taking the piss now or what?

 

[mpw]

...a car sounds it's horn...

...motorists aren't supposed to...

...So why do they fit horns to cars?...

For reasons that do not include "alert a cyclist to your presence"...

But a moment ago you said motorists weren't to sound their horns at all...

I didn't say that...

Yeah you did, I've bolded where above.

...Seriously are you just taking the piss now or what?

No. I just debating with you whether the use of this technology is dangerous, the reason it's gone on longer than was probably necessary, as you stated in your last post, is that because you perhaps misunderstood what you've read, and in doing so you've gone on to post arguments against the use of this technology which don't make much sense to me.

But now you've re-read what I originally posted and taken it in we can leave it there: You don't like it and want it banned because you don't like it.

 

[pseudobrit]

Yeah you did, I've bolded where above.

Yeah, and also you took it out of the context in which I was replying, which seems to be a continuing theme here.

But now you've re-read what I originally posted and taken it in we can leave it there: You don't like it and want it banned because you don't like it.

That and the fact that it's already a regulated concept. But I've only been saying that pretty much all along, haven't I?

I only hope you can find a way to chomp off a snippet of this post and once again to fold it sideways and try to shove it up my ass. You having fun there, champ?

 

[mpw]

Yeah, and also you took it out of the context in which I was replying, which seems to be a continuing theme here...

I didn't take anything out of context, if anything you did.

...I only hope you can find a way to chomp off a snippet of this post and once again to fold it sideways and try to shove it up my ass. You having fun there, champ?

Hey, I only edit the quotes for brevity. If you want I'll quote them in full and they say the same thing.

 

[CalBoy]

I'm not trying to get in the middle of your little row here, but this is the full context:

Riding your bike at 20mph and a car sounds it's horn, would therefore also scare you,

Which is why motorists aren't supposed to do it.

 

[pseudobrit]

I'm not trying to get in the middle of your little row here, but this is the full context:

I was just about to post that exact exchange. Thank you.

 

[pseudobrit]

Hey, I only edit the quotes for brevity. If you want I'll quote them in full and they say the same thing.

That's funny, I never knew the definition of "brevity" was "to completely misconstrue someone's statement and beat them over the head with it."

 

[CalBoy]

I was just about to post that exact exchange. Thank you.

You're welcome. Now don't let me stop your discussion, it's actually quite riveting for the audience!

 

[mpw]

Riding your bike at 20mph and a car sounds it's horn, would therefore also scare you, a person shouting from the sidewalk, another cyclist etc. etc. this isn't the only audible sound on the street so why is it in particular going to cause somebody to be scared. And if it's not the only thing which is more sensible; ban all sound, or perhaps the easily scared cyclist needs to wear ear protectors for his, and others safety...

Okay, so the context is better understood I'll again quote myself, this time a whole paragraph. A paragraph you quote partially in your reply:

Riding your bike at 20mph and a car sounds it's horn, would therefore also scare you,...

Which is why motorists aren't supposed to do it...

Now I've said a motorist has sounded his horn in my post, and you've replied that he isn't supposed to.

Now I'm going to make an assumption, which I try not to do, that you've wrongly assumedcompletely misconstrued that I've meant the motorist sounded the horn at the cyclist. I never meant or said that. But you've seen an opportunity to make a post implying what I've said is wrong. I've also mentioned in my paragraph other audible sounds, but you ignored those, you cut them from your reply, was this because you couldn't think of any argument to counter what I was saying other than cherry picking bits and making wrong assumptions?

 

[pseudobrit]

Now I'm going to make an assumption, which I try not to do, that you've wrongly assumedcompletely misconstrued that I've meant the motorist sounded the horn at the cyclist. I never meant or said that.

"Riding along at 20mph and a car sounds its horn" sounds to me like the motorist is honking at the cyclist the way it's phrased. I'm also coming at this from the perspective of a cyclist, where this is a common and annoying occurrence.

I've already tried to concede that I may have misunderstood your statement, but you apparently would like to continue with this little pissing match, so you threw it back in my face. Whatever floats your boat there, ace.

I've also mentioned in my paragraph other audible sounds, but you ignored those, you cut them from your reply, was this because you couldn't think of any argument to counter what I was saying other than cherry picking bits and making wrong assumptions?

How did I ignore those now?

Because while someone shouting from the sidewalk or blasting their horn from behind me is a very external and remote noise where the distance and direction can be quickly ascertained, I'd be quite freaked by the sensation of someone sharply whispering into my ear in the same setting.

 

[mpw]

...How did I ignore those now?

Yes you're right, you didn't ignore them. Sorry.

And yes you did concede that you might have misunderstood what I was saying... right before asking if I was taking the piss, then you went on to accuse me of quoting you out of context, editing bits of your post to 'shove up your arse', misconstruing what you'd said and 'beating you over the head' and ending these accusatory posts with things like 'ace' and champ' which I take as attempts at belittling sarcasm.

And no I won't go on trying to defend myself against your accusation in what you deem to be a 'pissing match'. I assume to be anything but a pissing match I'd need to just accept your unfounded accusations.

Anyway, I'm not going to bother posting in this thread anymore so you can make all the ******** accusations about me you want.

 

[pseudobrit]

Anyway, I'm not going to bother posting in this thread anymore so you can make all the ******** accusations about me you want.